Skip to main content

About your Search

20130115
20130123
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)
option. this is the congressman. >> the public option would decrease the deficit 104 billion over 10 years . >> and not everyone agrees that government health insurance would save money. republican critics say it is too costly and could bankrupt the country so who is right. >> i am dave asbin. welcome to forbes on fox. it is elizabeth mcdonald and rick unger and morgan bren an . we just can't afford a full-blown national health care system. >> no, we can't. every country that tried the health care system experienced higher cost or less health care. with obama care, it is a back door in a single payer system. of course, it costs more. >> mark tage. this is what he has plan obama care is not a single payer plan which is national health care. is that what it is turning into? >> i think it is going to have to be a single payer plan. will this reduce the deficit, no. is your goal here to provide health care to people? >> the private sector has not done a good job of >> it is going two or three times the rate of inflation . >> but you are saying that a government take over of health care w
are going to reduce health care costs in society. will this reduce the deficit? no. it depends on what your goal is here. is your goal here to provide health care to people because the private sector has not done a very good job. >> the government will do better? >> we have seen costs in the private sector go up two to three times the rate of inflation. >> the government takeover would be cheaper and more efficient than the private health sector? >> there would be more people covered and the cost would be lower if we had a government plan, a government -- >> is there anyway to prove that contention? >> no, i hear what mark is saying. and by the way this congressman is someone who said we should unionize doctors. we have a veterans administration who is doing health care that was not so great. i wish it was better. for the one size fits all approach, it is costly. we don't have the same demographics as britain and canada. even the health care costs rise dramatically in those countries. and this bill which i read is saying that they would pay out increasing taxpayer funds to increase coverage
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)